An interesting story (religious, but I post it due to the unexpected motif)

[amadeus]

A guy reading a book sees a black bird outside his window. The bird flies away.

 

[Kyriakos]

Famous works of literature as rewritten by the Kyriakos method:

Now that's unfair, it's not my method
Maybe you are of the view I came up with the story? I did not! It may well be a hoax, but not one by myself.

I was only comparing the story version where the boy would have been able to keep walking, to the one told. Personally I do think that of those two, the extant one is more interesting.

And since you mentioned the Metamorphosis, that story begins by violently crawling away from the in medias res, as Gregor only for a moment wonders why this happened - likely because he was too afraid to examine it in earnest

 

[Gori the Grey]

Yeah, yeah. Princess Schmincess. I've got vaporizers to fix.

Now that's unfair, it's not my method

You are advocating for the position that it makes a better story, less boring.

By the way, this exchange gave you your 77,777th post!

 

[Kyriakos]

Lucky number 77777. From now on, everything will be great :S

 

[Theov]

If man can command God, then who is God?

Has little to do with what I said, has it?

 

[amadeus]

Has little to do with what I said, has it?

Not from the way I see it, not putting words into your mouth but just throwing the idea out there.

Man demands proof and God obliges, does that not seem like a reversal of roles? I was going to say that could be a story, but they already made Bruce Almighty.

I guess I mean it could make for a good story.

 

[Kyriakos]

One of the issues, imo, with belief in a god, is that you can always have created that god in your mind and get feedback from a loop. I suppose that is also why miracles are important in religions; you can hardly produce a miracle if you are just a figment of one's imagination.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Paradise Retained: No thanks, curiously articulate serpent. I'm good.

 

[Kyriakos]

Paradise Retained: No thanks, curiously articulate serpent. I'm good.

 

[Gori the Grey]

That Daisy sure is appealing, but, you know, there are other fish in the sea.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I was only comparing the story version where the boy would have been able to keep walking, to the one told. Personally I do think that of those two, the extant one is more interesting.

Are you claiming that it's inherently interesting in and of itself, or only interesting because it bucks a trend? I can't really believe it's the former because I can't comprehend how a story about an impossible recovery from a crippling injury is uninteresting, while a story about a continuing crippling injury with a 5 minute respite of no consequence is the interesting one.

 

[Kyriakos]

Are you claiming that it's inherently interesting in and of itself, or only interesting because it bucks a trend? I can't really believe it's the former because I can't comprehend how a story about an impossible recovery from a crippling injury is uninteresting, while a story about a continuing crippling injury with a 5 minute respite of no consequence is the interesting one.

It rests upon agreeing that it is only a story -if it was verified reality, then certainly the miracle would impress, but if it is fiction then a miracle is something you can create at will.
There is a subgenre of fiction called conte cruel (French for "cruel tale"). It rests on a similar principle, and a good example of that type was a story where a person was convicted to death and was taken to be hanged. But the executioners left before establishing that he died, and miraculously some fault with the rope allowed him to stay alive. So the person started running away - and was promptly picked up by the executioners again, because they used faulty rope on purpose to have him suffer one last time.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

But there's a purpose to that, no? Showing the cruelty of the executioners for example. What's the purpose, narratively, of having a miracle be un-performed? We know it happened as the reader, so it's only of interest in what it reveals about the world of the story, or the impact it would have in the world if the story. But we know that, if it really happened, it would be less impactful to have the miracle undone. Maybe again it's just to show the cruelty of God? I can't see what else it reveals or why it would be interesting as a story.

 

[Kyriakos]

If religiousness isn't a factor, I don't see how a cruel god isn't arguably more interesting than a social-worker-god. Not that the purpose of this story (which apparently isn't canon and may have been using the name of a known saint as a hoax) would be explicitly in that - perhaps it rests on a motif found also in Job and the Rich man and Lazarus biblical tales, ie that suffering here will be rewarded etc. But it didn't interest me due to religious reasons - I am agnostic.

I once recall being told of an orphan who was taken from the orphanage, briefly, and then returned. In that case, of course, the kid knew that the stay outside would be brief. But some people had questioned whether this was a good thing or not - yes, the kid would know of a more pleasant life for a little bit, but there was the chance the return to the orphanage would discourage - that it would give hope only to take it away.
Multiplying the time, this isn't very different from the immobility story - the analogue of the orphanage is life on Earth, which at some point would stop, but in the case of this one they briefly had a taste of something better. I don't see how it could be argued that it's a more interesting (fictional) story to take a kid to your home forever, than to see the tension a brief stay will create. If it is taken as a real story, of course no one wants the kid to lose, but in fiction you can use tensions and obstacles and categorical denials of this type.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I agree that a cruel God is more interesting than a fluffy friendly God, but like you said it's not about that. The comparison with the orphanage story is interesting, but again the interest there is in the effect of the experience on the child, and where that led. But in the un-miracle story it seems that you're saying the interest is in the effect that hearing about the temporary miracle would have on other people. But I imagine the effect would be much like the effect hearing the story had on me - I don't believe it happened and there's no evidence that it did so it has no effect. Whereas an undeniable persistent miracle obviously would have more of an effect on people. So if the interest lies in the effect the event has on other people then that's why it doesn't seem like it would make for an interesting story to me. Because I can't imagine the event would have any consequence. Again, unless you want to tell a story about a cruel God or a bitter and disappointed child I suppose.

 

[Kyriakos]

I think that, assuming the association with the well-known saint was a hoax, they possibly have presented such a story exactly because it is outside of what you would expect. Stories about (if you are religious etc) supposedly real miracles can have charm or allure even if it is the standard form, but if you were creating a hoax could you really aspire to have the story stick to memory if it was following the norm? Would people be conned into buying their (again, assumed to be, but likely so) fake account from the life of a very known monk, if that account was barely any different from what is available in unquestionably more prestigious collections?
Imo even the novelty alone is enough to keep it from being forgotten.

As for the point of the story, that wasn't something I suggested - it was in the very story itself that the cancellation of the miracle was explained as being a better method of making people believe. I agree that it's not likely to work like that irl.

 

[Gori the Grey]

So they put his infant son in the path of his ploughing. Knowing that they would realize he was feigning madness if he swerved to avoid him, Odysseus instead ran him through. He never did have to suffer the pains of the Trojan War or laboriously win his way back to his home. But, frankly, things weren't great with Penelope from that point on.

 

[Kyriakos]

So they put his infant son in the path of his ploughing. Knowing that they would realize he was feigning madness if he swerved to avoid him, Odysseus instead ran him through. He never did have to suffer the pains of the Trojan War or laboriously win his way back to his home. But, frankly, things weren't great with Penelope from that point on.

You do recall that Odysseus was so enraged that he made sure to destroy the man who devised the plan which revealed his intentions. And he was said to have been the second most intelligent among the heroes